Law and reality in publishing (seldom the same thing) from the author's side of the slush pile, with occasional forays into politics, military affairs, censorship and the First Amendment, legal theory, and anything else that strikes me as interesting.

24 May 2010

Second Helping

These very well might not qualify as "link sausages" under USDA standards... because they're all meat, no filler.

It appears that Lord Lester  a well-known barrister who was partly responsible for fashioning the so-called "Reynolds defence" of fair comment by media  has been serious enough about reforming England's reprehensible libel law to introduce a private member's bill doing so... which, since the matter is due to be mentioned in the Queen's speech tomorrow, just might have a snowball's chance in hell of getting passed. Exactly a snowball's chance in hell.

The problem is that it's a Private Member's Bill introduced in the House of Lords, which remains the single greatest monument to the value of reputation (and against the value of free speech) in England. That's why I give the bill as introduced a snowball's chance in hell: Regardless of party allegiance, it can  and almost certainly will  be killed by the personal interests of those who've been stung (justifiably or not) by England's press, or who fear such. It's fascinating to me that the press is more intrusive and more outlandish in nations where there is less guarantee of freedom of the press  even if often on behalf of the authorities, it's still intrusive and outlandish. One might think that if the esteemed members of that House really did value their reputations, they'd be in favor of relaxing libel laws on that basis... unless, that is, they're afraid of the results when truth becomes a complete defense.

James Frey: First a literary "con artist" (so to speak... although I personally put most of the blame on the publisher and its S&M department), then a class-action defendant. Sometimes law professors really do try to grapple with reality. Or at least literature. Well, maybe not: The author of that piece is Canadian...

Remember in high school when you were studying the US Constitution (if you weren't, you should still pay attention), and you tried to figure out what a "bill of attainder" was? Well, here it is. And it does matter, because ultimately what got ACORN in trouble was pissing off the Tea Partiers with its message that all is not well in America. Leaving aside the validity (or not) of the charges against ACORN regarding voter registration drives, petition drives, etc., it is impossible to foresee Congressional action being taken during the reign of George III, and under a Heffalump majority, against a pro-Tea-Party group that expended similar efforts and used similar tactics to (a) prevent them newcomers from registering to vote and/or (b) did the same thing in Appalachia... among folk of Northwest European descent.

The answer, I think, is that libertarianism, like other ideologies, provides a single ready answer to all questions: Government is the problem. Communists (real communists) believe that poverty and other social ills are all the product of the exploitation of the poor by the rich; Nazis say everything is the fault of the Jews; and radical Islamists blame the social and economic problems of most Islamic societies on the ruling elite's corruption by Western culture. Of course, in 21st century America, one can hardly found a viable political movement on communism, Nazism, or radical Islam. By contrast, libertarianism is a kind of extreme form of core American values themselves. Goldwater was tapping into something authentic when he said that "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." Authentic but nonetheless wrong in its zeal to oversimplify.

(emphasis in original) But then, I have a much harsher view of libertarianism, and fascism, and communism, and virtually every other political movement in history that has relied upon demonization of an Other. I could call it "simple-minded bigotry," but that, I think, understates its power and misleads as to its origin. It is, instead, magic  pure, simple, simplistic, visceral, ideological, and free of all context (and most thought). But the Mad Tea Partiers ("In This Style, 10/6") couldn't possibly be doing anything like that, since they're all from xtian 'murica, right? Well, speaking of mythological origins unsupported by facts... like "liberal" as even existing in modern US political thought...

The Fine Print

Ritual disclaimer: This blog contains legal commentary, but it is only general commentary. It does not constitute legal advice for your situation. It does not create an attorney-client relationship or any other expectation of confidentiality, nor is it an offer of representation.

I approve of no advertising appearing on or through syndication for anything other than the syndication itself; any such advertising violates the limited reuse license implied by voluntarily including syndication code on this blawg, and I do not approve aggregators and syndicators whose page design reflects only an intent to use the reference(s) to this blawg without actually providing the content from this blawg.

Internet link sausages, as frequently appear here, are gathered from uninspected meaty internet products and byproducts via processes you really, really don't want to observe; spiced with my own secret, snarky, sarcastic blend; quite possibly extended with sawdust or other indigestibles; and stuffed into your monitor (instead of either real or artificial casings). They're sort of like "link salad" or "pot pourri" or "miscellaneous musings" (or, for that matter, "making law"), but far more disturbing.

I am not responsible for any changes to your lipid counts or blood pressure from consuming these sausages... nor for your monitor if you insist on covering them with mash or sauce.

Blog Archive

Warped Weft

Now live at the new site. I have arranged some of the more infamous threads that have appeared here by unravelling them from the blawg tapestry (and hopefully eliminating some of the sillier typos). Sometimes, the threads have been slightly reordered for clarity.

Other Blawgs, Blogs, and Journals

These may be of interest; I do not necessarily agree with opinions expressed in them, although the reasoning and writing are almost always first-rate (and represent a standard seldom, if ever, achieved in "mainstream" journalism). I'm picky, and have eclectic tastes, so don't expect a comprehensive listing.

How Appealing is aimed at appellate lawyers and legal news in general. If you care about the state of the law, start here — Howard's commentary is far better balanced, better informed, and better considered than any of the media outlets. To concentrate on the US Supreme Court, don't forget SCOTUSBlog.

Some academics' blawgs with a variety of political (and doctrinal) viewpoints:

The main European IP blawg of interest remains the UK-based IPKat, on a variety of intellectual property issues, with some overlap (with a less Eurocentric view) at IPFinance

The American Constitution Society blawg is a purportedly "liberal" counterweight to the so-called "Federalist Society" (which, despite its claims, should be called "Tory Society") that has yet to establish much coherence... but maybe that's all to the good.

Approximate Views

(page impressions since the last time the server's counters were reset, at present early 2007)